오이디푸스 콤플렉스를 넘어서: 로렌스와 들뢰즈의 정신분석학 비판
Overcoming the Oedipus Complex: Lawrence and Deleuze on Psychoanalysis
2
조회
0
다운로드
8
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Though criticized for the apparently eccentric ideas quite different from those of Western scientific minds, D. H. Lawrence’s two psychological books, Psychology and the Unconscious and Fantasia of the Unconscious, remain central to understanding psychology in general as well as the novelist’s ethics and philosophy of life. For Lawrence, the unconscious of Freudian psychoanalysis has no positive meaning because the whole body of our repressions makes up our unconscious; it all along the line fails to determine the nature of the pristine unconscious in man. He points out that the incest motive is just a logical deduction of the human reason, which has recourse to this last extremity to save itself. Rather, the true unconscious is the spontaneous life-motive in every single living creature. It is underivable and inconceivable as a general thing or a mathematical unit because it exists only in living creatures. Furthermore, the baby’s first consciousness develops not from the brain, but from the solar plexus in the belly, which indicates the psychical to Lawrence is inseparable from the physical in its nature. In Anti-Oedipus published in 1972, Gille Deleuze and Félix Gattari find in Lawrence the poignant critic of Freudian psychoanalysis. They argue that Oedipus is not a real repressing representative, but a factitious product of the displaced psychic repression. So the desiring-machine, which is neither the living nor the machine, can escape the Oedipal codes which force the individuals to adjust to a unified whole. Also, “the body without organs” can provide the way out of the psychological framework of capitalism by preferring differences over uniformity, flows over unities, and the nomadic over the sedentary. However, having little regard for the life that is only in the living individuals, they ultimately fail to escape the idealistic nature of Western philosophy and determine the nature of true unconscious.
Abstract
Though criticized for the apparently eccentric ideas quite different from those of Western scientific minds, D. H. Lawrence’s two psychological books, Psychology and the Unconscious and Fantasia of the Unconscious, remain central to understanding psychology in general as well as the novelist’s ethics and philosophy of life. For Lawrence, the unconscious of Freudian psychoanalysis has no positive meaning because the whole body of our repressions makes up our unconscious; it all along the line fails to determine the nature of the pristine unconscious in man. He points out that the incest motive is just a logical deduction of the human reason, which has recourse to this last extremity to save itself. Rather, the true unconscious is the spontaneous life-motive in every single living creature. It is underivable and inconceivable as a general thing or a mathematical unit because it exists only in living creatures. Furthermore, the baby’s first consciousness develops not from the brain, but from the solar plexus in the belly, which indicates the psychical to Lawrence is inseparable from the physical in its nature. In Anti-Oedipus published in 1972, Gille Deleuze and Félix Gattari find in Lawrence the poignant critic of Freudian psychoanalysis. They argue that Oedipus is not a real repressing representative, but a factitious product of the displaced psychic repression. So the desiring-machine, which is neither the living nor the machine, can escape the Oedipal codes which force the individuals to adjust to a unified whole. Also, “the body without organs” can provide the way out of the psychological framework of capitalism by preferring differences over uniformity, flows over unities, and the nomadic over the sedentary. However, having little regard for the life that is only in the living individuals, they ultimately fail to escape the idealistic nature of Western philosophy and determine the nature of true unconscious.
참고문헌 (16)
- 강미숙, "The Rainbow와 Women in Love 연구: D. H. 로렌스의 여성관과 ‘새로운 민주주의’의 모색" (1998), 서울대학교 대학원
- 김영희, "비평의 객관성과 실천적 지평: F.R. 리비스와 레이먼드 월리엄즈 연구" (1993), 창작과 비평사
- 박찬부, "기호, 주체, 욕망: 정신분석학과 텍스트의 문제" (2007), 창작과 비평사
- 이진경, "노마디즘" (2002), 휴머니스트
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia" (1996), U of Minnesota P
- Deleuze, Gilles, "A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia" (1987), U of Minnesota P
- Kinkead-Weekes, Mark, "“The Genesis of Lawrence’s Psychology Books: An Overview", D. H. Lawrence and the Psychoanalytic, 27(2), pp.153~170
- Lawrence, D. H, "“Democracy.” Reflections on the Death of a Porcupine and Other Essays", pp.61~83 (1988), Cambridge UP
- Lawrence, D. H, "Fantasia of the Unconscious and Psychoanalysis and the Unconscious" (1971), Penguin
- Lawrence, D. H, "Phoenix: The Posthumous Papers of D. H. Lawrence" (1978), Penguin
- Lawrence, D. H, "Phoenix II: Uncollected, Unpublished, and other Prose Works by D. H. Lawrence" (1978), Penguin
- Lawrence, D. H, "Why the Novel Matters. Study of Thomas Hardy and Other Essays", pp.191~198 (1985), Cambridge UP
- Lawrence, D. H, "Women in Love. Ed. David Farmer, Lindeth Vasey & John Worthen" (1987), Cambridge UP
- Leavis, F. R, "Thought, Words and Creativity: Art and Thought in Lawrence" (1976), Chatto & Windus
- Paik, Nak-chung, "Freud, Nietzsche and Fantasia of the Unconscious", D. H. Lawrence Studies, 12(2), pp.59~82 (2004)
- Wallace, Jeff, "D. H. Lawrence, Science and the Posthuman" (2005), Palgrave Macmillan